In her second IPS-Nathan Lecture, Professor Lily Kong revisited the transformative role of universities, challenging the current beliefs and practices in higher education. She highlighted four critical areas for re-evaluation: the prevailing emphasis on cognitive skills, universities’ response to rapid technological advancement, the importance of interdisciplinary depth, and the need for universities to position themselves as lifelong learning partners.
The 100-Year Life
Drawing on Lynda Gratton and Andrew Scott’s book, The 100-Year Life, Professor Kong questioned the adequacy of a traditional three-stage life of education, work and retirement. People will experience multiple transitions and career shifts, requiring a “fundamental redesign of life” and an urgency for employers, governments and universities to adapt and change. She highlighted the need for continual learning opportunities that cater to both cognitive and non-cognitive aspects of human development. “Higher education should no longer be a phase that is only between 18 and 25,” Professor Kong explained. “Rather, each individual’s engagement with universities must be reshaped into a journey that extends throughout our lives, and for some, only later in life.”
The Current State of Educational Delivery and Experience
Professor Kong outlined limitations within current university models, noting significant barriers to flexibility and adaptability. She pointed to challenges like low or uneven enrolment rates, rigid curricula, hyper-specialisation, the decline of the humanities, didactic pedagogy and traditional assessment methods.
Declining birth rates in developed countries like Japan, she noted, exacerbate the problem. “Declining enrolments do not need to portend university mergers or closures,” she argued, but rather invite rethinking universities’ roles and expanding their scope. The uneven access to higher education often widens socio-economic divides, while inflexible curricula and early specialisation hinder students’ abilities to pivot in response to personal interests or professional needs.
She then addressed hyper-specialisation within curricula. While beneficial in specific fields, hyper-specialisation limits graduates’ ability to tackle complex global issues that require integrated approaches. Additionally, the decline of humanities enrolment worldwide jeopardises the cultivation of essential skills that machines cannot replicate — human intuition, creativity, empathy, and above all, a profound understanding of the human experience.
Professor Kong also highlighted shortcomings in pedagogy, noting that traditional, didactic teaching methods remain dominant, despite the demonstrated benefits of dialogic and experiential learning. Standardised assessments are still widely used, raising concerns such as grade inflation and undermining educational rigour, whereas competency-based assessments remain less common. She suggested these issues compromise higher education’s relevance and impact in an increasingly complex world.
In Parentheses: Universities’ Economic and Societal Contexts
Acknowledging the broader context beyond universities, Professor Kong noted that economic and political challenges pose additional constraints on universities worldwide. Under-investment in higher education limits universities’ societal contributions, even in major economies. Meanwhile, universities have increasingly become arenas for cultural and political conflicts, with ideological divides and debates over free speech threatening to overshadow their educational missions.
Student Outcomes in Higher Education: Unemployment, Underemployment and Quiet Quitting
Professor Kong discussed the challenging employment outcomes faced by graduates in various regions. Citing examples from Taiwan and China, high rates of unemployment and underemployment reflect a disconnect between university training and real-world requirements. Young graduates are choosing to “quiet quit” and “lie flat”, a cultural shift indicative of how the traditional metrics of job success are evolving. These trends, she argued, fit well with the multi-stage life that Grattan and Scott write about, in which the current intensity of work cannot be extended for longer periods in the 100-year life.
Charting Paths Ahead
In response to these challenges, Professor Kong proposed that universities support individuals across longer, more complex lives. Citing Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences, which include verbal-linguistic; logical-mathematical; spatial-visual; bodily-kinaesthetic; musical; interpersonal; intrapersonal; naturalist; and existential, she advocated that universities go beyond developing cognitive intelligences. To develop the intrapersonal intelligence of young people, universities have to help students build up their resilience, self-awareness, and a spirit of exploration and experimentation, such as through “galumphing”, a term invented by Lewis Carroll in Alice in Wonderland. She called on universities to facilitate crucible experiences and provide opportunities for independent production. It would require universities to loosen up structures and not be judged by traditional measures of efficiency and success.
Accentuating Our Humanity, Cultivating Human Qualities
Professor Kong argued that universities must cultivate human qualities that artificial intelligence cannot replicate — such as empathy, intuition and interpersonal skills. She emphasised the critical role of the humanities in this endeavour, noting that subjects like literature and history offer essential insights into the human condition, which is increasingly vital as technology permeates the workforce. “Where robots can dispense medicines, and chatbots replace human conversations,” she observed, “the jobs that will withstand the fourth industrial revolution are precisely the ones that require an understanding of human nature and a reliance on human empathy.”
Is There a Case for Interdisciplinary Depth?
She then made a case for interdisciplinary depth in higher education, highlighting that global challenges such as climate change, public health and social inequality cannot be solved through narrow, disciplinary approaches alone. She argued that “both STEM disciplines (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) and humanities, arts and social sciences disciplines are needed to address global and local challenges.” Science and technology, she explained, can only offer answers to “what” can be done, while the humanities and social sciences provide insights into psychological, social, cultural and economic factors that influence human behaviour. She proposed that universities encourage students to think across traditional boundaries and offer thematic, integrative programmes that address complex issues from multiple perspectives. However, she observed that there remains within academia some intellectual disciplinary snobbery and interdisciplinary departments and majors are likely to be the first to shut down when universities face financial crunch.
From 18 to 80: Universities as Lifelong Enablers
In her final recommendation for disruptive thinking, Professor Kong called for universities to become lifelong partners in learning, leveraging on AI and data analytics to personalise content. She advocated for age-integrative strategies in university programming, suggested that individuals learn to blend leisure and learning, while employers embrace work-integrated learning. These approaches, she argued, will be essential in enabling individuals to thrive in multi-stage lives, where continued growth and adaptability are paramount.
Conclusion
Professor Kong concluded her lecture by underscoring the need for universities to take bold, transformative steps to remain relevant in an era of extended longevity. As society moves towards the reality of 100-year lives, universities must pivot to offer lifelong, flexible, and human-centred education. She expressed hope that with these changes, universities would not only endure but flourish, positively impacting society for the century to come.
Question and Answer
In the question-and-answer section, moderated by Professor Chua Kee Chaing, President of Singapore Institute of Technology, Professor Kong addressed questions regarding the challenges and practicalities of implementing her proposed changes to higher education. The conversation delved into the systemic and cultural shifts required for universities to support the evolving needs of students and society in the context of a “100-year life”.
Professor Chua opened with a question about the practical challenges universities face in implementing these transformations. Professor Kong acknowledged that translating envisioned ideas into action requires navigating entrenched academic and societal contexts.
“We all exist within certain academic contexts … dominated by disciplinary thinking,” she observed, noting that interdisciplinary approaches often “run against very deep-seated biases.”
She suggested a “loosening up on the margins,” allowing universities some flexibility to accommodate more exploratory approaches like “galumphing” which, though challenging traditional metrics, could yield long-term benefits.
An audience member inquired about balancing established structures within academia with a spirit of exploration. Professor Kong clarified that she was not advocating for a dismantling of structures but proposing the adoption of a balanced approach that allows room for interdisciplinary learning alongside traditional disciplines.
An audience member raised concerns about disciplinary biases, especially in faculty hiring and promotions. Professor Kong candidly acknowledged the persistence of “disciplinary snobbery” in academic “tribes” and the need for patient, intentional shifts. She recounted efforts within her own institution to advocate for promotions that recognise interdisciplinary work, describing it as “almost like trench warfare” that requires ongoing commitment from academic leaders to walk the talk. She expressed hope, though cautiously, that these incremental changes could influence the broader academic landscape over time.
On the topic of lifelong learning, Professor Kong acknowledged societal and institutional barriers, such as the reliance on government subsidies through programmes like SkillsFuture, for adult education. She noted that fostering a culture of lifelong learning requires a societal mindset shift where individuals, employers, and institutions alike value and invest in continuous education. “It’s a whole-of-society mindset shift,” she remarked, emphasising the role of intentional steps from all stakeholders in creating a robust learning ecosystem.
Click here to watch the video of lecture II.